WHY LIBRARIES WILL CARE HOW LINKING WORKS... November, 2000

Citation LINK MAGIC LINK Cited Article Citation WHAT WE ALL WANT TO ACCOMPLISH CLICK Any old system

Citation DOI Step 1 Step 2 DOI Resolver DOI URL Cited article Search response Repository URL Article Step 3 HOW DOI PERFORMS “MAGIC” CLICK

BUT -- WHAT IF MORE THAN 1 COPY EXISTS? Elsevier journals, for example, are on-line at: –Elsevier ScienceDirect –OhioLink –University of Toronto

WHICH URL? Handle Server DOI URL? Sciencedirect.com? Ohiolink.edu? Utoronto.ca?

A PROBLEM DOI today cannot resolve to more than 1 copy

ACM DOI (to Elsevier) Ohio State User ELSEVIER Cited article OhioLink A BAD THING…. (or: “$25, please”) CLICK ARTICLE Citation

WHY MULTIPLE COPIES “Local loading” –A number of institutions are already loading e- journals for their local populations OhioLink, Toronto, University of Illinois... –As local digital library infrastructures (and archiving projects??) grow, this may become more common

WHY MULTIPLE COPIES Aggregators –Most electronic journal access in many institutions today is through aggregators OCLC EJO, EBSCO, Ovid, IAC, Bell & Howell –Smaller publishers, publishers outside of STM, and smaller libraries rely much more on aggregators than direct access through publisher sites

WHY MULTIPLE COPIES Mirror sites –Common for reasons of performance, redundancy, and telecommunications costs –Which mirror (address) you should use can depend on “where” you are on the net –Some publishers now negotiating for institutions to mount mirror systems for archiving (eg., APS mirrors at Cornell and Library of Congress)

WHY MULTIPLE COPIES E-print servers –A lot of current interest in building subject- specific e-print collections (which include published articles) LANL, PubMedCentral, CDL, Cornell... –And some interest in institution-specific services (D-Space at MIT) –Relationship to formal publications certain to be complex and overlapping

WHY MULTIPLE COPIES Preservation archives –Institutional failure is as great a danger as technological failure Multiple copies held by different parties is the best protection –May be no linkage problem if the archive is “dark”, but… How “safe” are unused copies? Much current discussion of “dim” (low functionality) full service archives for local use

THE APPROPRIATE COPY When more than 1 copy exists, specific populations frequently have the right to access specific copies –Some systems today can do this tailored linking (ISI, for instance) –But... it must be done by EVERY system from which links can come Can we expect every citation source to do this???

LOCALIZATION (THE INSIGHT OF SFX) In a world of restricted access and complex business arrangements, what options a user is given and what information s/he is offered is frequently a local question SFX demonstrates there are any number of links that an institution might choose to offer a user from a given citation Appropriate electronic copy is only the most immediate issue….

Paper is also a copy Electronic links are great, but users should also know there is local hard copy available

Any old system DOI (to Elsevier) Harvard User ELSEVIER Search response ANOTHER BAD THING…. (or: “$25, please”) CLICK but there is a free paper copy next door…. ARTICLE Citation

Proxy problem To provide access from off-campus, many libraries now provide proxy servers With most proxies, if you are not coming from a proxied resource, a link will not be proxied

PubMed DOI (to Elsevier) Off-campus User ELSEVIER Local Proxy Cited article Search response YET ANOTHER BAD THING…. (or: “$25, please”) CLICK ARTICLE Citation

DIGITAL LIBRARIES OF OLD Closed systems A designer at the top Predictable players and parts Control of both ends of a relationship Task was to build a system

NOW WE KNOW Open, open, open No one designer -- evolves organically Unpredictable players and parts Nobody is in control Task is integration of independent parts

WILL THE ENVIRONMENT BE CONSTRAINED? A generalized link-from-anywhere-to- anywhere solution will allow the e-journal environment to evolve naturally We are in a period of much necessary experimentation –Who are the players? –What are their roles? –How many options will users and libraries have?

DOI INFRASTRUCTURE FEELS QUITE CONSTRAINING TODAY (A HOT-LINKED DOI GOES ONLY 1 PLACE…) BUT CHANGING THIS WILL NOT BE EASY!

A CURIOUSITY (or, is something missing?) The primary unit in the DOI technical architecture is article but…. the primary unit of business for journals is title + year

SUMMARY 1. Multiple copies will exist, and if nothing is done we are going to have a bit of a MESS!

SUMMARY 2. Assuming a single point of resolution is too constraining at a time of rapid evolution and massive uncertainty about roles and players!

SUMMARY 3. The infrastructure must be built to support complexity, localization,and a variety of heterogeneous services and solutions!

CROSSREF/DLF LINKING PROTOTYPE Group of research libraries coordinated by DLF approached CrossRef on the “appropriate copy” issue Series of discussions between publishers, DOI, CrossRef, libraries, service providers, NISO ensued Prototype to test “localization” of linking over next 6+ months

Any old system Citation DOI Step 1 Step 2 DOI Resolver DOI URL Cited article Search response Repository URL Article Step 3 REMEMBER HOW DOI PERFORMS “MAGIC” CLICK

Any old system Citation DOI Step 1 Step 2 DOI Resolver DOI Search response PROTOTYPE ARCHETECTURE CLICK DOI SERVER: Does user have localization? LOCALIZATION SERVICE (at library or service provider) Y N

LOCALIZATION DOI resolution is optionally redirected to a server specific to a population Localization server decides what response a user should get for this DOI –Refer to electronic copy from publisher or alternate service (local, aggregator, etc.) –Information about paper copy in collection –etc., etc. Resolution is based on local collection and business arrangements